India-Srilanka

India-Srilanka
Friday, January 25, 2013
12:38 PM


India Srilanka relation- Issue on Katchatheevu


Katchatheevu Island- Disputed island between India and Sri Lanka. Now the island is part of the Sri Lanka. Before 19


Timelines

Before 1974The both side had claimed sovereignty over this island. The island was part of the Tamil Nadu

1974 and 1976Under the this treaties , The island is part of the Sri Lank

After 1976India has not asserted its claim while Sri lanka has continuously maintained control of the Island.

2013Tamil Nadus political parties has asked the centre govt. for retake possession of island as part of India territory. Tamil Nadu has invoked claim after the fisherman of TN are harassed by Sri Lankan Fisherman.


Possibility for India to retake possesion of Island

Lets see posibility on two angel:

1. Domestic law point of view

2. Internation angel (Vienna Convention)

Domestic law point of view:

As per Indian constitution, The ceding of Indian Territory requires constitutional amendment by parliament. Thus, Alienation of any part of the territory of Tamil Nadu requires an amendment of the first schedule to constitution. Both sides have entered into treaties but India has not given effect to ceding of Indian territory to Sri Lanka thriugh constitutional amendment. We can ascertain that the cceding of India territory to Sri Lanka should be considered invalid.

The pettion has filed in Supreme court argued same position. Now The supreme court can order the govt. to retake possession Indian territory from Sri Lanka. But the rulling of SC will not have binding effect on Sri Lanka. Because of two reasons:

1. Sri Lanka is Sovereign State, is immune from from the jurisdiction of the Indian Court.

2. Any such order will amount to the judiciary dictating foreign policy and should be avoided.

International Angel:

Suppose, India govt. can draw the Sri Lanka to International court. The argument of India over island would be weak. Because of the following reasons:

1. Both the treaties state that they are subject to ratification. It would not be part of concern for not giving effect of treaties in India through constitutional amendment. It is matter of domestic law. Ratification of treaty by both sides means it is entered into force.

2. Vienna Convention on law of Ratification: State may not invoke domestic law to avoid treaty obligation

3. Qatar Vs Bahraine issue in International Court of Justice on maritime delimination and territory question clarified that non compliance with a ratification requirement in domestic law does not invalidate treaty

4. Cambodia Vs Thialand issue in ICJ on temple preah vihear suggested that India has not asserted its claim while Sri Lanka has continuously maintained control of the island. Such silence of the one the disputed parties in territorial dispute has been construed as a abandonment of its claim in favour of other parties.

India-Sri Lanka Relation on 13th amendment

The 13th constitutional amendment of Sri Lanka was key point India-Sri Lanka relation made in 1987. The Rajiv Gandhi of India and Jayawarden of Sri Lanka has made agreement under the 13th constitutional amendment. The 13th constitutional amendment attempted to resolve the Sri lankas Ethnic Conflict.
The 13th constitutional amendment was directly result of Ind0-Sri Lanka Accord. The Indo-Sri Lanka Accord was international agreement between India and Sri Lanka under the International law. The Treaty Acknowledges that Sri Lanka is a multiethnic and multilingual plural society. Some provisions:

1. Meager of North and East provinces of Sri Lanka

2. Provide of provincial council with legislative power and executive council with executive power

3. Devolve power including on land and police
Under the agreement, The Sri Lanka is devolving power to provinces including north and east provinces dominated by Tamils. The Sri Lanka government is committed to implement provision in letter and spirit.

1998-The provincial council of north-eastern was constituted to give effect of 13th amendment
2000-The provincial council was dissolved
2006-The Supreme court of sri Lanka considered the process of meargin was flawless
2008- the council of east province was reconstituted but not north council. So the north province was deprived of their right of freedom and self-government

The Indian Government has dismayed by report suggesting that the Sri Lanka government is going to dilute provision of 13th amendment. The sri Lanka revealed agenda to restrict autonomous power of North east province by following ways:

1. Repeal constitutional provision granting people freedom to determine Administrative boundaries

2. Amend Constitution-So permit the central government to freely and arbitrarily legislate on provincial matters without the consent of people of particular province

3. Remove altogether provincial power over land and police
Why Do Sri Lanka Tamil and National Tamil Alliance oppose the dilution of 13th constitutional amendment?

1. Provide for mearger-so substantially provide bulwark against the domination of majority over Tamil minority

2. Provide some level of potential of self-government-it means Tamils could potentially have decision making power over Tamil Issues.

3. Guarantees to the minorities in Sri lanka that their Status as regional decision making will not be diluted through demographic manipulation
Why India opposes diluting 13th amendment?

1. Strong cultural, Social and linguistic bound between Sri Lankan Tamils and Tamils of South India. Indias long standing interest and concern for the well being and protection of the right of Sri Lankan Tamils

2. Dilution means Breach Sri Lankas international treaty obligation

3. Increase Tension in Sri Lanka-Hurt progress and development to boundary regions
Indias decisive response now to oppose any dilution of 13th amendment is both morally necessary and politically imperative. Indias principle stand on this issue will reinforce its international reputation as global power and the largest democratic in the world
Dipak Patel